this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2026
418 points (97.9% liked)

Science Memes

20648 readers
1085 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Meta Post Tags



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


If you are here asking: "Is this a science meme?"

Probably, yes. We use the Dawkins definition of meme: a replicating idea, not just an image macro with a fact on it. A good post here doesn't need to teach you something. It needs to make you ask something: who, what, where, when, and especially why or how.

Science isn't a filing cabinet of facts, it's a conversation. For example, a photo of an eel or other localized wildlife counts because most people never see one, and wonder is the first step of inquiry. A car meme counts if it makes you curious about what's under the bonnet. If you want to talk about something you noticed in the world, chances are someone else wants to talk about it too.

We moderate for vibe, not category. Pruning is light, especially where a post creates interesting discussion. Experimenting is encouraged.

See the pinned paper on Shitposting as Public Pedagogy if you want the academic case for why this works.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ivan@piefed.social 18 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I blame Jesus. If not for him - we'd probably still be believing in sacred forests and shit.

[–] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 days ago

Eh, it's not as if the romans were too kind to the forests. So if you're going back in time kill Caesar too before he genocides gaul of the protectors of the forest the Celts

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Correction: if not for the people who INVENTED Jesus.

[–] Zombie@feddit.uk 9 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Jesus, the person, existed as far as academic consensus is concerned.

Jesus, the son of God, on the other hand, only exists in the heads of the delusional.

The Christ myth theory, developed in 19th century scholarship and gaining popular attraction since the turn of the 20th century,[15][16][2] is the view that Jesus is purely a mythological figure[17] and that Christianity began with belief in such a figure.[18] Proponents use a three-fold argument developed in the 19th century: that the New Testament has no historical value with respect to Jesus's existence, that there are no non-Christian references to Jesus from the first century, and that Christianity had pagan or mythical roots.[19][20] The idea that Jesus was a purely mythical figure has a fringe status in scholarly circles and has had no support in critical studies for more than a century, with most such theories going without recognition or serious engagement.[21][2][note 4]


David Gullotta states that modern interest in mythicism has been "amplified by internet conspiracy culture, pseudoscience, and media sensationalism".[16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Jesus, the person, existed as far as academic consensus is concerned.

Yeah, the academic consensus of Christian theologians 🙄

the New Testament has no historical value with respect to Jesus's existence

Obviously true.

there are no non-Christian references to Jesus from the first century

Or references to him form ANYONE who were alive at the same time he supposedly was, for that matter.

Christianity had pagan or mythical roots

Also factually accurate.

The idea that Jesus was a purely mythical figure has a fringe status in scholarly circles

Because guess what? The people who choose to dedicate their lives to studying theology or first century Palestine history tend to be people who believe in the myths. It's inherent confirmation bias.

Next you're going to tell me that it's an undisputed fact that draconian punishment reduces crime rates, based on the testimony of cops and conservative demagogues 🙄

[–] Zombie@feddit.uk 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I recommend reading the Wikipedia page. It debunks your debunking quite thoroughly.

Christians aren't the only people to have studied that time period.

Jesus was a man of near no economic means and no military power. The fact there's even any historical references to him is a klaxon for his existence. I'm from an area of the world that has next to no written records for the entire peoples that lived here throughout several centuries of the early middle ages, and yet it's not doubted they existed. It seems then pretty difficult to doubt the existence of a single man with which there's so much written from an even earlier period.

If Jesus existed in modern times I'm sure there'd be conspiracies that the CIA is trying to wipe out the memory of the slave abolitionist and communist revolutionary. But because a cult of personality and religion got built around him for centuries, that is now one of the dominant philosophical and political powers in the world, the opposite view is taken. It's all a conspiracy, maaaan!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Picts

Non-Christian sources used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus include the c. first century Jewish historian Josephus and Roman historian Tacitus. These sources are compared to Christian sources, such as the Pauline letters and synoptic gospels, and are usually independent of each other. Similarities and differences between these sources are used in the authentication process.[103][104][105][106] From these two independent sources alone, certain facts about Jesus can be adduced: that he existed, his personal name was Jesus, he was called a messiah, he had a brother named James, he won over Jews and gentiles, Jewish leaders had unfavorable opinions of him, Pontius Pilate decided his execution, he was executed by crucifixion, and he was executed during Pilate's governorship.[107] Josephus and Tacitus agree on four sequential points: a movement was started by Jesus, he was executed by Pontius Pilate, his movement continued after his death, and that a group of "Christians" still existed; analogous to common knowledge of founders and their followers like Plato and Platonists.[108]

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The fact there's even any historical references to him is a klaxon for his existence

"He's real because it was weird that someone made him up" 🙄

I'm from an area of the world that has next to no written records for the entire peoples that lived here throughout several centuries of the early middle ages, and yet it's not doubted they existed

Yeah, those WILL leave traces beyond the written records. Where's your archaeological proof of the significant carpenter?

It seems then pretty difficult to doubt the existence of a single man with which there's so much written from an even earlier period.

Yeah, someone being written about a lot even though they're not rich DOES prove that they're real! Case in point:

If Jesus existed in modern times I'm sure there'd be conspiracies that the CIA is trying to wipe out the memory of the slave abolitionist and communist revolutionary

Nah, if he lived in modern day, he'd probably be murdered by the IOF, being a Palestinian from the West Bank.

But because a cult ~~of personality~~ and religion got built around ~~him~~ a bunch of different people that they turned into one like Arwen in the LotR movies

Fixed it for you.

now one of the dominant philosophical and political powers in the world

Bolded the operative words.

The myth have been kept alive not by being true, but by being a tool of domination for those who have and want to maintain power.

Or to quote Eleanor Ferguson, "Christianity didn't become a world religion because of quality of its teachings, but by the quantity of its violence"

Similarly, the Liberal Zionism-esque "compromise" of Jesus being real but not divine was established not from the preponderance of evidence or even reason, but from being overly trusting of biased authority figures.

Non-Christian sources used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus include the c. first century Jewish historian Josephus

A braggart known to exaggerate and embellish accounts to make himself and the Jewish people look good.

And he wasn't born until the supposed Jesus had already died, making all the things he "reported" about it as an adult historian decades old hearsay at best.

As for Tacitus, that was one passage in 116 CE, a modern day lifespan after the events described where he gets names and titles wrong and doesn't reference a source.

Hardly the irrefutable evidence you like to pretend it is.

Jesus, the person, existed as far as academic consensus is concerned

because can you imagine what would happen to academics if academia decided jesus didn't exist.

[–] asdasd201@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 3 days ago

Wasn't Joshua (aka Jesus) a rabbi?

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think monotheistic messianic religions were kind of unavoidable seeing how in every part of the world they have been the most successful religions once societies become more complex and interconnected.

[–] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Only if you define Buddhism as more successful than Hinduism and Confucianism, and define pre-Buddhism India and China as simple or isolated.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 days ago

Modern Hinduism precisely changed a lot to compete and stay relevant when other faiths starting to show up in India.

It became much less focused on the polytheism and much more focused on philosophy like Buddhism.

Their own polytheistic beliefs has been shaped to be more similar to the Christian trinity. And many gods are seen as part of one supreme God.

It's just natural evolution of religions. In ancient times religions where about explaining natural phenomena. Thus we had the god of the sea, the god of the sun, the god of the rain, etc.

As those things got explained by science the gods needed to become more philosophical and vague.

Also societies got bigger. You used to have the god of your tribe, and rhe tribe next to you had another god, a d you fight one against the other. Then people lived in empires, with millions of people under an unique faith. To keep them all united a single good and a well structured religion is more useful.